Telangana High Court pulls up Sircilla Collector, asks whether he wants to go to jail
Collector renders apology for over-reaching his powers in getting registered a criminal complaint against a land acquisition victim
Hyderabad: Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti of the Telangana High Court on Wednesday came down heavily on Rajanna Sircilla District Collector Sandeep Kumar Jha, for over-reaching his powers in getting registered a criminal complaint against a land acquisition victim, Vanapatla Kavita of Anupuraram village in the district. The court asked the Collector if he was ready to go to jail for contempt of court, following which Jha rendered an unconditional apology.
The Collector had failed to appear before the court on Tuesday despite there being a specific direction to appear before the court. Justice Anil Kumar warned the Additional Advocate General that the court was inclined to issue a warrant if the Collector did not appear before the court by the post-noon session at 2.15 pm. It was the case of Kavita that she lost her land under the Mid Manair project, however, the authorities had not included her name in the list of beneficiaries under the rehabilitation scheme.
In the earlier round of litigation, she had obtained an order from the High Court with a direction to the authorities to include her name in the list of rehabilitation beneficiaries. Further challenging the non-compliance of the said order, she filed a contempt case, contending that holding a grudge against her, the Collector had directed the RDO and Tahsildar to initiate civil and criminal cases against her.
Accordingly, the Vemulawada Tahsildar had filed a complaint against her and a criminal case was booked for allegations of making misrepresentations before the court. Kavita filed the present case to quash the criminal case against her. Justice Anil Kumar reprimanded the Collector when he finally appeared before the court. The judge wondered what was the fate of citizens if the Collector was behaving in such a manner. He questioned the Collector on the misrepresentation made by Kavita and why it was not brought to the notice of the court in the earlier round of litigation.
In a proceeding that went on for about two hours, the judge questioned how the Collector had come to the opinion that the court’s order was erroneous and asked the Collector if he was ready to go to jail under the Contempt of Court Act. The Collector rendered an unconditional apology by conceding that the statements made by him were wrong. The judge concluded the hearing in the case, with the orders awaited.
